Forum:Diaspora politics
Diaspora politics, according to academic Yossi ShainShain, Yossi & Tamara Cofman Wittes. Peace as a Three-Level Game: The Role of Diasporas in Conflict Resolution in Ambrosio, Thomas. 2002. "Ethnic identity groups and U.S. foreign policy." Praeger Publishers. ISBN 027597532, is the study of the political behavior of transnational ethnic diasporas, their relationship with their ethnic homelands and their host states, as well as their prominent role in ethnic conflicts. The study of diaspora politics is part of the broader area of diaspora studies. Overview The main concepts are: *An ethnic identity: based on ethnic heritage, religious practices or cultural traditions. *An ethnic group: a population which shares a coherent ethnic identity. *A homeland: a geographic territory (cultural geography) of great importance to an ethnic group because of a long history and a deep cultural association, and potentially the ethnic group's place of origin. *An diaspora: a transnational community defined by its shared ethnic identity, often descended from the forced or induced emigration of an ethnic group from its traditional homeland. *:While diaspora communities "do shift their self-conceptions, and by consequence their politics, over time in response to geographic separate, life in different types of societies, and other separate experiences", as a whole, they do retains objective components of a coherent ethnic/national identity including a "shared history", "folkways such as food and music," and, in many cases, "the objective reality of a territorial homeland." *The host states of the diaspora: the modern states, geographically distinct (and usually removed) from the original ethnic homeland, in which a diaspora community resides. Ethnic diaspora communities are now recognized by scholars as "inevitable" and "endemic" features of the international system, writes Shain and Wittes, for the following reasons: # First, within each of a diaspora's host states, resident members can organize domestically to maximize their political clout. # Second, a diaspora can exert significant pressure in its homeland's domestic political arena regarding issues of diaspora concern. # Lately, a diaspora's transnational community can engage directly with third-party states and international organizations, in effect bypassing its homeland and host state governments. Diasporas are thus perceived as transnational political entities, operating on "behalf of their entire people", and capable of acting independently from any individual state (be it their homeland or host states.) Political spheres Diaspora are politically active in three separate realms: their outsider influence on their homeland's domestic politics, the exercise of their domestic political rights within their host states, and their independent involvement at the international level. Homeland Reasons for attention While all transnational diasporas retain objective components of a coherent ethnic identity such as a "shared history and folkways such as food and music," in some cases, diaspora's also share "the objective reality of a territorial homeland." When ethnic homelands exist, they serve as "the physical embodiment" of the diaspora's shared identity and thus the "its political and territorial fate has profound implications" for that shared "subjective identity." For the diaspora the homeland territory serves predominantly as an identity function, any practical value of homeland territory discounted since is not directly relevant to the diaspora's daily experience. There are also a number of variables which affect the significant given to a homeland by its diaspora including: # Degree of competition for leadership of the transnational community #:Expand based on # Other political interests and goals of the diaspora in the host state #:Expand based on # Desire of the diaspora to maintain its ethnic identity as they conceive it #:Expand based on # First-hand experience of the homeland #:Attachment and identification can strengthened by first-hand experience of diaspora members of the homeland. First-general immigrants often exhibit strong connections to their homeland which can decrease in future generations which only know the homeland from stories and media. The recognition of the role in which first-hand experience plays in the identification and emotional attachment to the homeland, there have been efforts to encourage diaspora members lacking first-hand experience to visit their homelands. A few diaspora communities, most notably the Jewish and the Armenian diasporas, have created "Birthright" programs (such as Birthright Israel) which offer to diaspora members all-expenses paid vacations to the homeland complete with fully planned itineraries designed, to give those who take advantage, an educational, and very memorable homeland experience. # News media coverage of homeland struggles and aspirations #:Additionally, a diaspora able to follow remotely, typically via news media, the aspirations and struggles of a homeland can strengthen their attachment and identification to their homeland. The bonding effect of news concerning the homeland on the diaspora has been very evident, Shain writes, in the relationship of the Jewish diaspora towards its homeland, Israel. Negotiating the national interest "The very notion of a unified people that stretches across frontiers is complicated because in international relations, a state can in principle represent only the people living within its boundaries." While a diaspora community may share an ethnic identity, the homeland must constitute for itself a national identity which in turn lets it identity its national interest and thus implement a coherent political strategy in pursuit of its identified national interests. The "national interest", often referred to by the French term raison d'état, is a country's goals and ambitions whether economic, military, or cultural. The notion is an important one in international relations where pursuit of the national interest is the foundation of the realist school. The national interest of a state is multi faceted. Primary is the state's survival and security. Also important is the pursuit of wealth and economic growth and power. Many states, especially in modern times, regard the preservation of the nation's culture as of great importance. Ethnic homelands "often have come to rely on the diaspora's political clout and financial assistance, at home and internationally." Thus it is necessary to ensure the support of diaspora by accommodating its ethnic identification needs in the formulation of the homeland's national identity. "Although national identity can be negotiated between homeland and diaspora, the structure of modern international relations give the prerogative of constituting, elaborating, and implementing the national interest to the government of the homeland state." "In reality, neither the diaspora nor the homeland community ultimately dominates in constitute and communicating national identity." "The degree to which the one influences the other is associated with the relative strength that the homeland and the diaspora can exercise via-a-vis one another through monetary flows, cultural productions, community leadership, and the life." "Diasporas may be considered by kin states as part of their national security equation under the premise of mutual responsibility." Israel, Shain writes, recruited the Jewish diaspora to be an active participant in its conflicts by including in its construction of its national identity, its responsibility "for the well-being of all Jews around the world." The conflict between the homeland's national identity and the diaspora's ethnic identity often results in the diaspora emphasizes different aspects of the national narrative resulting in the diaspora embracing a slightly different interpretation of the homeland's national interest than that of held by the homeland's citizens. "A certain degree of flexibility can be preserved because of the distance between homeland and diaspora: each can, to a degree, put its own 'spin' on the national narrative and life out their shared identity in its own way." "Sufficient areas of overlap exist that homeland-diaspora ties can be quite close despite differences of emphasis in the national narrative." Domestic politics Some diasporas have became significant players in the domestic circles of their homelands according to Shain and Wittes. Diasporas are vocal in their declarations of support for elected homeland politicians or in voicing their belief that certain politicians in their homeland may be "betraying the national causes" as they see it. There have been mass demonstrations of support or opposition by diaspora communities in response to specific policy decisions by their homeland governments. In addition, diasporas have targeted domestic public opinion in their homelands as its domestic political development via the use of "monetary contributions, affiliated political parties, and transnational communal organizations." Host states Diaspora communities can both influence the governments and public of their host countries, as well has have their social and political status in a host country affected by the polices of their homeland authorities. Lobbying for ethnic interests - may be enlisted by their ethnic homelands to lobby or influence host governments. According to Thomas AmbrosioAmbrosio, Thomas. 2002. "Ethnic identity groups and U.S. foreign policy." Praeger Publishers. ISBN 027597532, "like other societal interest groups, ethnic identity groups establish formal organizations devoted to promoting group cohesiveness and addressing group concerns." While many formal organizations established by ethnic identity groups are apolitical, others are created explicitly for political purposes. In general, groups who seek to influence government policy on domestic or foreign issues are referred to as interest groups. Those interest groups established by ethnic identity groups are referred as to ethnic interest groups. Potential liabilities These issues, can result in real danger to the local diaspora community. May lead to racism directed towards the diaspora community, either directly or by being co-opted by opportunities extremists. Diaspora communities are almost always minorities in their host states, and thus at risk from the majority of xenophobia or persecution. Collective responsibility "Involvement in an ongoing violent conflict, can impinge on the political or social status of a diaspora community in their host society." "When kin states violate norms that are valued by the host state, diasporas are often implicated or held accountable morally and politically. The state government and perhaps even the state public may expect diaspora leaders to persuade or pressure their homeland government to alter its policies in a more congenial direction." Conflicting loyalties "Homeland conflicts and peace efforts can confront diaspora leaders with a dilemma of dual loyalties and torn allegiances." Dual loyalty is a person who is a dual citizen or who is an immigrant living in one country, although the term is sometimes used in connection with people that have religious, cultural or political ties to a political interest other than the country of their primary residence. As opposed to ethical dual loyalty, which is often a self-described situation, political dual loyalty typically appears as an attack or a pejorative accusation designed to target and discredit a particular person or group, and to call into question the loyalty of that group to the country where they reside. As such, the accusation of "dual loyalty" is often used or co-opted by racist or xenophobic groups within a country, regardless of the original intent of the accusation. International A diaspora's transnational community can engage directly with third-party states and international organizations, in effect bypassing its homeland and host state governments. Bilateral relations Diasporas have, in addition to their domestic political involvement in the homeland and host states, also directly influenced bilateral international relations of states of concern. In some cases, diasporas have appeared to "bypass" their own homeland traditional sovereignty over its own international relations via "privately funded activities, and by lobbying governments" of the diaspora host states as well as those of third-party states. Shain and Wittes cite the following as examples of international relations involvement: * "Armenian-American lobbying groups successfully pass a congressional ban on U.S. aid to [[Azerbaijan] (known as Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act) that has withstood many years of White House efforts to have it overturned." * "Jewish-American lobbying organizations have pressed for the United States to move its embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, against the wishes of the U.S. administration and often those of the Israeli government as well." * "The American Jewish Committee and B'nai B'rith both devoted impressive lobbying efforts to encourage newly independent post-Soviet states to establish diplomatic relations with Israel." Non-governmental organizations :To do. only mentioned briefly in ShainWittes2002. Mobilizing events The are specific situations of great concern to diasporas, which can result in significant community mobilization. Nationalist movements When a homeland does not exist, but strongly desired, the diaspora can be instrumental in making the dream of ethnic nationalism a reality. :See: :* Ethnic nationalism :* Self determination :Examples: :* Armenian national movement :* Kurdistan :* State of Palestine :* Zionism Homeland conflicts Shain writes that when a "homeland is under severe threat, diaspora concerns about the homeland's existential survival are often paramount, and divergent opinions may be subsumed under a broader show of support." Public relations Diasporas, according to Shain and Wittes, can be "propagandists" for their homelands. Lobbying for foreign intervention #Host states can be influenced of lobbied ## toward favorable interventions in the conflict - allies ## directly punishing /isolating non-ally or opposing states #International organizations ## for UN scantions. ## for UN peacekeeping. Military aid Military aid from diasporas to their homelands can be vital in period of violent conflict. Military aid offered by a diaspora, according to Shain , can varying from fundraising in support of military purchases, directly supplying weapons, or serving "as a source of recruits." Shain cites the example of the military fundraising of the Eritrean and Ethiopian diaspora communities in the United States in response to the latest Eritrean-Ethiopean conflict, the eventual result of which was hundreds of millions of dollars in arm purchases by their respective homelands Shain quotes from Jesse Driscoll's account of the competing diaspora fundraising efforts: :"The energy and organization of the Eritrean diaspora, however, was simply overpowering... With none of the credibility baggage of the regime in Ethiopia, Eritrea called upon its wealthy and energetic... diaspora.... The fundraising efforts of President Issaias Afeworki in the United States have reached legendary status among those who following the conflict."Driscoll, Jesse. 2000. "The Economics of Insanity: Funding the Ethiopia-Eritrea War", Georgetown University. Resolution efforts Shain writes that when a "homeland is under severe threat, diaspora concerns about the homeland's existential survival are often paramount, and divergent opinions may be subsumed under a broader show of support." While, as discussed above, disagreements between the diaspora and the homeland are suppressed in times when the homeland is under threat, once "the possibility of peace arises, homeland-diaspora debates and power struggles reemerge." "diaspora attempts to promote its own view of its ethnic community's identity and interests, a view that is not always congruent with the view of the homeland authorities." There is a "contest between homeland and diaspora over national identity and national interest." "Consider a state that gives up its claim to a piece of historically significant territory in oder to achieve peaceful relations with a neighboring state." "Diaspora and homeland citizens often have different attitudes towards the implications such polices have for ethnic and national identity." "For many homeland citizens, territory services multiple functions: it provides sustenance, living space and security, as well as a geographic focus for national identity. If giving up a certain territory, even one of significant symbolic value, would increase security and living conditions, a homeland citizen might find the trade-off worthwhile." "By contrast, for the diaspora, the security of the homeland is of course important as well; but the territory's identity function is paramount. Its practical value (and indeed the practical value of peace with a formal rival) is not directly relevant to the diaspora's daily experience." "In such situations, altering the geographic configuration of the homeland state for the sake of peace may be far more disturbing to the diapora elements than to segments of the homeland community." "The homeland-diaspora nexus is such that on some occasions, the diaspora may feel threatened by homeland decisions, in other situations the homeland may feel that diaspora preferences threaten national goals." "To a large degree, homeland leaders and publics feel that their direct stake in the outcome of their conflict with their neighbors should trump any diaspora preferences. On the other hand, they often have come to rely on the diaspora's political clout and financial associate, at home and internationally." Negotiation as a "three-level game" Because of the potential of conflict between the homeland's national interests and the diasporas ethnic interests, and the ability of the diaspora to act independently as a deal-breaker when it feels its interests are at stake, Yossi Shain argues for explicitly including diasporas in peace negotiations that concern their homeland. Specifically, Shain argues that the standard "two-level game" model for international peacemaking is inadequate for conflicts in which parties have mobilized the support and involvement of political active diaspora, because it doesn't acknowledge or provide a means to deal with the influence these groups wield. The "two-level game" model, introduced in 1988 by Robert Putnam, recognizes only two stakeholders at being relevant to a successful outcome, the domestic political constituencies of each state and each state's foreign negotiating counterparts.Robert D. Putnam. "Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games." International Organization. 42(Summer 1988):427-460. Shain believes that, in situations were antagonistic states have politically active diaspora communities, a "three-level game" model is a more accurate reflection of the reality that state leaders face. Shain's "three-level game" explicitly recognizes that state leaders must, as a requirement for successful peacemaking, engage with their diaspora communities as an additional stakeholder party to the conflict wholly distinct from two stakeholders of the Putnam's original "two-level game" model. Modern politically active diasporas See also * Diaspora * Ethnic interest group * Ethnic nationalism Further reading * Beck, Robert J. and Thomas Ambrosio. 2001. "International Law and the Rise of Nations: The State System and the Challenge of Ethnic Groups." CQ Press. ISBN 188911930X * Hockenos, Paul. 2003. "Homeland Calling: Exile Patriotism and the Balkan Wars." Cornell University Press. ISBN 0801441587 * Shain, Yossi. 2005. "The Frontier of Loyalty: Political Exile in the Age of the Nation State (New Edition)." University of Michigan Press. ISBN 0472030426 * Shain, Yossi. 1999. "Marketing the American Creed Abroad: Diasporas in the UN and Their Homelands." Cambridge University Press. ISBN 052164531X * Shain, Yossi & Tamara Cofman Wittes. Peace as a Three-Level Game: The Role of Diasporas in Conflict Resolution in Ambrosio, Thomas. 2002. "Ethnic identity groups and U.S. foreign policy." Praeger Publishers. ISBN 027597532 * Shain, Yossi and M. Sherman. 1998. "Dynamics of disintegration: Diaspora, secession and the paradox of nation-states." Nations and Nationalism. 4(3):321-346. References Categories * Category:Diasporas - Politics, diaspora * Category:Ethnicity in politics * Category:Political science * Category:International relations